October 15, 2015 Dear friends and colleagues, Anti-immigrant extremists are again pushing the GOP -- and the country -- toward zero-immigration policies. Their current standard-bearer, GOP presidential primary candidate Donald Trump, derives his immigration policy prescriptions almost verbatim from those posited by groups such as FAIR, CIS, Numbers USA and others like them. They have consistently opposed and undermined reasonable attempts to reform immigration policy. They will keep doing it, whether or not Mr. Trump captures the GOP presidential nomination. We believe that it’s in the best interest of immigration reformers, corporate America and the country to step up efforts to expose the nativist groups’ influence on policy formation, on the media, on the political process and on the government. Sunshine is, after all, the best disinfectant. It is especially important that the larger public know about the links these groups have to population control groups, in particular to proponents of eugenics. Only by exposing them can the process of marginalizing and ultimately defeating them take root. We hope that the enclosed report will deepen understanding of the politics of immigration reform and galvanize anew commitments to an inclusive, fair-minded and welcoming America. Feel free to share widely: we welcome your ideas, critique and suggestions. Rick Swartz (rs@sswdc.com) and Jocelyn McCalla (jmccalla@jmcstrategies.com)

FROM KNOW-NOTHINGS1 TO KKK TO TANTON TO TRUMP

PRIMER ON THE ANTI-IMMIGRANT FORCES DETERMINED TO HIJACK AMERICAN POLITICS

By Rick Swartz and Jocelyn McCalla2 October 15, 2015

Anti-immigrant extremists are again pushing the GOP -- and the country -- towards zero-immigration policies. Their current standard-bearer, GOP presidential primary candidate Donald Trump, has significantly raised the bar by labeling Mexicans as rapists and violent people who bring crime and drugs to the United States. He has also ridiculed Asians and called for extreme and costly measures to control immigration: mass round-up of all undocumented immigrants followed by swift deportation, the construction of high walls the length of the Southern border with Mexico and ending birthright citizenship, among other things.

Mr. Trump’s immigration policy proposals – which according to the Wall Street Journal emanate from his “brain trust at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)3 – are neither novel nor different than those promoted stridently by France’s “Front National”, a racist, far-right political party founded in 1975 in opposition to immigration and led by Marine Le Pen.

“Migrants bring filth, crime, poverty and Islamic terrorism, Ms. Le Pen has suggested in recent weeks; a dead migrant child’s photo was simply a ploy to manipulate European feelings of guilt. France is about to be “submerged” in a “terrifying” wave of migrants who represent only a ‘burden.’”4

Nonetheless, Trump’s immigration proclamations have upended the GOP race for the presidential nomination. In spite of being roundly condemned by corporate America, Trump leads the pack of candidates vying to be the GOP’s presidential nominee in 2016. This is partly thanks to

1 The "Know-Nothings" developed as a secretive nativist movement that was pro-slavery and

opposed to the immigration and naturalization of German and Irish Catholic immigrants as well as Chinese immigration. In 1854, they successfully captured seats in Massachusetts and influenced elections in New York, San Francisco, Philadelphia, and Chicago. Emboldened by their victories, they formed the Native American Party but remained a secretive organization: when asked about party activities, members were told to reply "I know nothing." Outsiders simply called them "Know-Nothings." The American Party faded into oblivion starting in 1856. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) emerged 10 years later in 1866 and orchestrated a campaign of terror and intimidation to maintain or restore white supremacy in the southern states.

2 Rick Swartz is the President of Strategic Solutions, a public policy firm based in Washington, DC. He founded the National Immigration Forum in 1982. Mr. Swartz can be reached at rs@sswdc.com. Mr. Jocelyn McCalla served as the Executive Director of the National Coalition for Haitian Rights. He can be reached at jmccalla@jmcstrategies.com.

3 Wall Street Journal, Those Assimilating Immigrants, Opinion October 7, 2015 4 Adam Nossiter, The New York Times, For Marine Le Pen, Migration Is a Ready-Made Issue,

October 5, 2015

Page 2 of 21

his populist appeals. In response, leading GOP primary candidates are wavering on legalization, retreating to the safety of a Borders-First stand, with many embracing some or all of Trump’s proposals or coming up with their own Trump-like proposals. Such stands put them in direct conflict with the GOP strategy for the 2016 elections which bets on peeling off enough Latino votes from Democrats to capture the White House and keep control of Congress.

One needs only look across the Atlantic to Hungary to get a flavor for what Trump’s policies would yield. Prime Minister Viktor Orban shut off the country’s border to refugees fleeing war and political persecution from the Middle East. He says that “he is acting to save Europe’s ‘Christian values’ by blocking the main overland route used by Muslim refugees, who travel through the Balkans and cross his country mainly to reach Germany or Sweden.”5

Trump’s success in tapping into the GOP primary voters’ fear of the future by singling out immigration as a threat to their livelihood is surprising to many. However, considering that the ground for it has been seeded by groups and institutions that have promoted an anti-immigrant agenda for decades, it is no accident. Indeed, Trump’s immigration policy prescriptions derive almost verbatim from those posited by such groups. Guided by population-control ideology, they have consistently opposed and undermined reasonable attempts to reform immigration policy. They will keep doing it, whether or not Mr. Trump captures the GOP presidential nomination. Thus one must see and go beyond the Trump phenomenon in order to address immigration policy.

WHICH GROUPS ARE DRIVING THE ANTI-IMMIGRANT AGENDA? The groups driving the anti-immigrant agenda include the Federation for American

Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), Numbers USA and their offshoots throughout the country. These groups seek nothing less than a zero-immigration policy and zero tolerance for immigrants. To cover their tracks, these groups deploy the rhetoric of

5 Krisztina Than and Ivana Sekularac, Reuters, Hungary locks down EU border, taking migrant

crisis into its own hands, September 15, 2015

“I am not a Know-Nothing… When the Know-Nothings get control,

[the Constitution] will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics. When it

comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be

taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy [sic]"

Abraham Lincoln, August 24, 1855

Page 3 of 21

“controlled immigration,” casting themselves as reasonable proponents of “common sense” immigration reform.

Virtually all of these organizations are connected to one man: John H. Tanton. Roy Beck, Executive Director of Numbers USA, is the former Washington editor of The Social Contract, a quarterly journal founded in 1990 by Tanton who retains the title of publisher. In 1979, Tanton founded FAIR which six years later, in 1985, gave birth to CIS as a so-called impartial think tank.

According to Human Life Review, Tanton is “the father of the population-control wing of the modern anti-immigration movement. Born in 1934, Tanton became an avid environmentalist at a young age. From early on he believed that population growth was the great enemy of environmental conservation. 6

In the 1970’s Tanton served on the board of Zero Population Growth (ZPG). “It was during that time that he concluded that controlling population growth required not only abortion, family planning, and other efforts to decrease fertility, but also required ending all immigration.”7

In 1975, John Tanton authored “The Case for Eugenics,” in which he advocated a “passive” form of Eugenics. He received early support from

the Pioneer Fund, an organization created for the express purpose of promoting eugenics. Tanton used funds from the Pioneer Fund to develop FAIR.8

Thus, he labored to develop “a network of radical anti-immigrant groups (including those mentioned above), all of which receive a significant portion of their funding from foundations such as the Colcom Foundation founded in 1996 by Cordelia Scaife May who, like Tanton (who undoubtedly influenced her views on immigration), had concluded that “the well-intended actions of most environmental organizations are doomed to failure unless and until they recognize that the

6 Mario Lopez, Hijacking Immigration, Human Life Review October 28, 2012 7 Ibid 8 See http://www.adl.org/civil-rights/immigration/c/ties-between-anti-immigrant-eugenics.html.

“In recent years, our immigration policy has become a matter of major

national concern. Long-dormant questions about the effect of our immigration laws now assume first-rate importance. What

we do in the field of immigration and naturalization is vital to the continued

growth and internal development of the United States – to the economic and social strength of our country – which is the core

of the defense of the free world. Our immigration policy is equally if not more important to the conduct of our foreign relations and to our responsibilities of moral leadership in the struggle for

world peace.” President Harry Truman

June 25, 1952

Page 4 of 21

degradation of our natural world ultimately results from the press of human numbers.”9 Translation: control populations, and restrict or end immigration altogether. Ms May died in 2005, but left the Colcom Foundation with a war chest of $400 million.10 We note that Colcom’s Vice-President of Philanthropy, John H. Rohe, published several articles in Tanton’s Social Contract from 1991 to 2006. He is the author of a biography on Tanton and his wife entitled Mary Lou & John Tanton: A Journey into American Conservation.

The Tanton network groups have done their best over the last decades to turn the public away from pro-immigration policies and to ensure the election of like-minded politicians to the House and Senate, and the defeat of those--Republican and Democrat--opposed to their agenda.

In 2000, several GOP Senators took the unusual step of publicly denouncing a FAIR smear campaign against one of their colleagues, Sen. Spencer Abraham. The 16 Senators, among them Orrin Hatch and the late Strom Thurmond, stated that:

“Attacking individuals based on their religion or ethnicity appears to be a specialty of FAIR. The Miami Herald has reported that FAIR’s founder, expressed the concern that ‘too many new American immigrants are Roman Catholic.’ The Wall Street Journal wrote of an active FAIR member who is engaged in an effort to sterilize women in the Third World, in part to limit the potential pool of future immigrants. The Executive Director of FAIR [Dan Stein] has made anti-Catholic statements of his own, telling a reporter, ‘Certainly we would encourage people in other countries to have smaller families. Otherwise they’ll all be coming here, because there’s no room at the Vatican.’”11

A 2011 New York Times profile of Dr. Tanton notes that:

“The immigration-control movement surged to new influence in last fall’s elections [2010] and now holds near veto power over efforts to legalize any of the 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States.

9 Colcom foundation, History, http://colcomfdn.org/history/ 10 See more at: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/05/12128/scaife-funded-network-

works-hard-kill-immigration-reform#sthash.2J2xSj8S.dpuf

11 Robert F. Bennett, Dear Colleague Letter on FAIR, April 19, 2000.

“Remember, remember always, that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and revolutionists.” ― Franklin D. Roosevelt

Page 5 of 21

One group that Dr. Tanton nurtured, Numbers USA, doomed President George W. Bush’s legalization plan four years ago [2007] by overwhelming Congress with protest calls. Another, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, helped draft the Arizona law last year [2010] to give the police new power to identify and detain illegal immigrants.

A third organization, the Center for Immigration Studies, (CIS) joined the others in December [2010] in defeating the Dream Act, which sought to legalize some people brought to the United States illegally as children.”12

FAIR recently appointed its Communications Director, Mr. Bob Dane, as its Executive

Director. Mr. Stein became its President. The change in leadership does not signal a change of policy or philosophy. Mr. Dane has served as FAIR spokesperson since 2006 and is on record as praising Trump’s immigration policy proposals as the "American Workers' Bill of Rights."13

THE ANTI-IMMIGRATION CHAMPIONS IN CONGRESS In the current debate, Donald Trump is simply

the standard-bearer of a nativist agenda that extends far and beyond him. The two most prominent nativists in Congress are Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Representative Steve King (R-IA). Both are staunchly opposed to even the slightest immigration reform measures, except sealing of the borders. Many credit Sen. Sessions with shaping Trump’s immigration policy proposals.

Rep. King who takes great pride in deriding immigrants from Latin America, is a member of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus (IRC) which champions causes and legislation in tune with FAIR’s aims. The HRIC was established in 1999. At its height it claimed a membership of more than 100 House Representatives. Its ranks dwindled in 2013 to about 58 members, among them Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) who serves on the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, along with Reps. King and Raul Labrador (R-ID).

Their approaches are out-of-line with mainline Republican thinking on immigration. However they resonate with the House Freedom Caucus, a loose group of about 40 conservative extremists, which appears dead set on torpedoing any pro-immigration reform measures and those in the GOP who lean in favor of such measures. Sessions, King and the Freedom Caucus have turned their backs on the immigration principles laid out by the late President Ronald Reagan who famously said in his 1989 farewell address to the American People:

12 Jason DeParle, NY Times, The Anti-Immigration Crusader, April 17, 2011 13 Alan Gomez, USA Today, Much of Trump immigration plan not 'radical' in GOP circles, August

18, 2015

Now, as in the past, latent public

resentment provides fertile ground for blatant demagoguery and

sophisticated innuendo. Rick Swartz, March 1985

Page 6 of 21

"I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. [I]n my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and heart to get here."

COSTS TO THE AMERICAN ECONOMY OF IMPLEMENTING THE NATIVISTS’ IMMIGRATION PROPOSALS

Trump, Sessions, King and their supporters boldly claim that their proposals will “improve jobs, wages and security for all Americans.” Most economists disagree.

According to the American Action Forum, “the federal government would have to spend roughly $400 billion to $600 billion to address the 11.2 million undocumented immigrants and prevent future unlawful entry into the United States. In order to remove all undocumented immigrants, each immigrant would have to be apprehended, detained, legally processed, and transported to his or her home country [over a twenty year period]. In turn, this would shrink the labor force by 11 million workers and reduce real GDP by $1.6 trillion.”14

The National Journal estimates the cost of building an immigrant-proof wall along the Southern border at $6.4 billion. According to Stephen Goss, chief actuary for the Social Security Administration, undocumented immigrants contribute $15 billion annually to Social Security. This sum would vanish along with the deported.15

In short, far from enhancing the average American worker’s prospects of a better living standards once undocumented immigrants disappeared, these proposals would increase their burden of shouldering the economy.

Moreover, these proposals ignore the key role that remittances play in sustaining livelihood in Latin America and other parts of the world. The World Bank estimates that remittances from the

14 The Budgetary and Economic Costs of Addressing Unauthorized Immigration: Alternative

Strategies By Ben Gitis, Laura Collins, March 6, 2015 15 Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-does-donald-trumps-

immigration-plan-cost-2015-8#ixzz3kUoWyjlP

Page 7 of 21

USA totaled some $123 billion in 2012. “Mexico had almost $23 billion in remittances, and migrants from each of India, China, and the Philippines sent over $10 billion home.”16

THE WAY FORWARD By casting immigration in the worse possible light

and by riding it for all it’s worth, perhaps all the way to the nomination, Donald Trump has brought the debate on immigration policy and reform to the forefront. Unwittingly, he is forcing people and corporations to take sides. Some companies – Macy’s, NBC, Serta, and Univision, among others – have distanced themselves from him. The

Club for Growth has launched a multimillion dollar campaign against Trump, claiming that he is “the worst Republican candidate on economic issues.” The National Immigration Forum Action Fund has also launched an ad campaign focused on “the idea that when we focus on freedom, not fear, America is better.”17

Polls after polls, surveys after surveys say that the majority of the American people do not subscribe to Trump’s nativism. CBS News/New York Times surveys over the last two years through September 2015 consistently show that Americans overwhelmingly agree that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to legalize and eventually gain citizenship.18 A Wall Street Journal/NBC News Poll, conducted in late July 2015 at the height of the anti-immigrant frenzy stirred up by Trump’s campaign, found that the majority of Republicans favored legalization over deportation for undocumented immigrants.

“Building a nation,” said Pope Francis on the occasion of his recent visit to the United States, “calls us to recognize that we must constantly relate to others, rejecting a mindset of hostility in order to adopt one of reciprocal subsidiarity, in a constant effort to do our best.” He added: “Let us remember the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (Mt 7:12). This Rule points us in a clear direction: Let us treat others with the same passion and compassion with which we want to be treated. Let us seek for others the same possibilities which we seek for ourselves. In a word, if we want security, let us give security. If we want life, let us give life. If we want opportunities, let us provide opportunities.”19

16 Andy Kiersz, Business Insider, Here's Where Migrant Workers In America Send Their Money,

Apr. 7, 2014, 5:02 17 Ali Noorani, Executive Director, National Immigration Forum, September 13, 2015. 18 http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm 19 Pope Francis, Address to Congress, September 24, 2015

“Immigration policy should be generous; it should be fair; it should be flexible. With such a policy we can turn to the world, and to our own past, with clean hands and a clear conscience.” ― John F. Kennedy, A Nation of Immigrants

Page 8 of 21

Let us then resolutely seize the opportunities at hand to engage the greater public accordingly. We believe that it’s in the best interest of immigration reformers, corporate America and the country to step up efforts to expose the nativist groups’ influence on policy formation, on the media, on the political process and on the government. Sunshine is, after all, the best disinfectant.

It is especially important that the larger public know about the links these groups have to population control groups, in particular to proponents of eugenics. Only by exposing them can the process of marginalizing and ultimately defeating them take root. We hope that this report will deepen understanding of the politics of immigration reform and galvanize anew commitments to an inclusive, fair-minded and welcoming America. Feel free to share widely: we welcome your ideas, critique and suggestions.

Rick Swartz, rs@sswdc.com

Jocelyn McCalla, jmccalla@jmcstrategies.com

October 15, 2015

Page 9 of 21

Appendix: On the Nativists

‘NATIVIST LOBBY’ IS WINNING ON IMMIGRATION

By Morton M. Kondracke, Roll Call Executive Editor, Jan. 13, 2011, Midnight

The failure of Congress and two presidents to enact immigration reform is plunging the nation into an ugly future. Call it the Arizonification of America.

Quite apart from the ghastly shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D) and 19 others in Tucson, Ariz., the state truly has become, as Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik described it, “a mecca for racism and bigotry” — largely over immigration.

It has become a state of Minuteman vigilantism, death threats against politicians and judges, talk-radio demagoguery, and bullying of Latinos and rival politicians by “America’s toughest sheriff,” Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County.

Now, governors and legislators in 23 other states are considering following Arizona’s lead in directing local police to act as immigration officers. And politicians in several states are contriving to, in effect, amend the U.S. Constitution to deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. if their parents are illegal immigrants.

All this represents a high-water mark in the influence of the “nativist lobby” — a richly funded assemblage of national and local groups organized by Michigan ophthalmologist John Tanton.

The groups, which have gained respectability, include the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the Center for Immigration Studies and NumbersUSA. But some investigations have tied Tanton to white-supremacist ideology as well.

The move to end birthright citizenship is led by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who is affiliated with FAIR’s legal arm.

Tanton’s groups are making use of economic hard times to argue that immigrants — legal and illegal — are stealing jobs from Americans and straining government budgets. It’s largely bogus

“There’s a long history in our country of demonizing ‘the other’ — Catholics by the Know-Nothings, Chinese, blacks, Jews. Americans ought to fear we’re in another one of those periods now.”

Rick Swartz

Page 10 of 21

because immigrants tend to take jobs that Americans won’t or can’t do and because illegal workers pay taxes but can’t get benefits.

If Congress had acted on immigration reform under President George W. Bush — it failed by five votes in 2007 — or if President Barack Obama had pushed it in his first year in office, as he promised, it might have included “impact aid” for communities with large undocumented populations.

In the present climate, attacks on illegal immigrants by radio talk-show hosts, politicians, vigilantes — and Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 — invite profiling of Latinos in general, giving the trend a racist tinge.

As immigration reform advocate Rick Swartz told me: “There’s a long history in our country of demonizing ‘the other’ — Catholics by the Know-Nothings, Chinese, blacks, Jews. Americans ought to fear we’re in another one of those periods now.”

Polls show that 60 percent of Americans support Arizona’s police enforcement law but that just as many support giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.

But GOP victories in 2010 will make it impossible for Congress to address the immigration problem constructively.

The prospect is for harsh enforcement measures to be considered in the House, then get blocked in the Senate or vetoed by Obama, producing continued federal stalemate — and state activism.

House immigration policy will be overseen by two longtime restrictionists, Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and immigration subcommittee Chairman Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)

Smith has indicated he wants to enact mandatory electronic verification of the citizenship of all new employees — a step that might lead to mass firing of undocumented workers. Some pro-immigrant reformers say they could support “mandatory e-verify” if it were accompanied by steps to enable presently undocumented workers to gain legal status.

But Republicans — and increasingly, even moderates — are opposed to anything smacking of “amnesty,” either because they fear the wrath of nativists or because of the prospect that former illegal immigrants will vote Democratic.

Interestingly, one of the harshest of all anti-immigrant Republicans, Rep. Steve King (Iowa), was expected to chair the immigration subcommittee, but he was displaced by Gallegly. King blamed Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), who King said is “not very aggressive on immigration.”

If that’s so, there will still be intense pressure for restrictive action, including a Congressional ban on birthright citizenship from FAIR and allied groups.

Page 11 of 21

In the nation’s capital and around the country, however, political leaders should be worried that conditions in Arizona will spread nationwide.

A brief recent history of events in the state prepared by the National Day Laborer Organizing Network includes neo-Nazi harassment of worker sites, lawsuits charging racial profiling, gun violence and verbal war between Arpaio and Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon over raids through Latino neighborhoods.

In October 2008, Arpaio sent a 60-member SWAT team on a 2 a.m. raid of the Mesa, Ariz., city hall and public library, hunting illegal immigrant janitorial employees.

In May 2010, Gordon announced he had received 5,000 threats — some of violence and death — for opposing S.B. 1070.

When federal Judge Susan Bolton halted enforcement of major parts of the law, she received hate mail and death threats.

And so did Judge John Roll, when he ruled in 2009 that illegal immigrants could sue a local rancher on charges of harassment. Roll died in the Tucson shooting rampage at the hands of deranged gunman Jared Loughner.

Loughner had nothing to do with the immigration issue, but there has been plenty of other ugliness in Arizona over it. Does America really want that to metastasize nationwide?

Page 12 of 21

Wall Street Journal GOP Nativists Tarnish Reagan's 'Shining City'

By JASON L. RILEY Updated March 15, 2004 12:01 a.m. ET

Mr. Bush, who's trying to prevent his party from being overtaken by its Rico Ollers, has his work cut out. So determined is conservatism's nativist wing that it's even made common cause with radical environmentalists and zero-population-growth fanatics on the leftist fringe. The Federation for American Immigration Reform and the Center for Immigration Studies may strike right-wing poses in the press, but both groups support big government, mock federalism, deride free markets and push a cultural agenda abhorrent to any self-respecting social conservative.

FAIR's founder and former president is John Tanton, an eye doctor who opened the first Planned Parenthood chapter in northern Michigan. By Dr. Tanton's own reckoning, FAIR has received more than $1.5 million from the Pioneer Fund, a white-supremacist outfit devoted to racial purity through eugenics.

Board members of FAIR actively promote the sterilization of Third World women for the purposes of reducing U.S. immigration prospects. And if anything disturbs the good doctor more than those Latin American hordes crossing the Rio Grande, it's the likelihood that most of them are Catholic, or so he once told a Reuters reporter.

CIS, an equally repugnant FAIR offshoot, is a big fan of China's one-child policy and publishes books advocating looser limits on abortion and wider use of RU-486. CIS considers the Sierra Club, which cites "stabilizing world population" fourth on its 21st century to-do list, as too moderate. And like FAIR, CIS has called for a target U.S. population of 150 million, about half of what it is today.

Unlike their counterparts on the restrictionist right, these organizations don't distinguish between legal and illegal immigration. They want the border sealed as a means to a fanciful, neo-Malthusian end. Both sides, however, do share the same intellectual framework -- an overriding pessimism and lack of understanding about markets, which is why both also tend to oppose free trade.

Page 13 of 21

Defending Immigrants, Interview with Rick Swartz Southern Poverty Law Center, Intelligence Report, Summer 2002 INTELLIGENCE REPORT: In looking at the contemporary anti-immigrant movement [see story, p. 44], we've found that even though there are a large number of organizations involved, they almost always seem to go back to one man - John Tanton, the Michigan ophthalmologist who founded the Federation for American Immigration Reform [fair] in 1979. Has that always been the case? SWARTZ: Tanton is the puppeteer behind this entire movement. He is the organizer of a significant amount of its financing, and is both the major recruiter of key personnel and the intellectual leader of the whole network of groups. I don't know if he's personally wealthy - it could well be that people give him big donations just because he is so mesmerizing. He does have a charismatic feel about him. It's been clear since 1988, when a series of embarrassing internal memos by Tanton and Roger Conner [who was then executive director of fair] were leaked to the press, what the overall strategy is. Those memos are a blueprint for what Tanton and his friends have been doing ever since. IR: Can you describe that blueprint? SWARTZ: The blueprint envisaged creating a whole array of organizations that serve the overall ideological and political battle plan to halt immigration - even if some of these groups have somewhat differing politics. They camouflage the links between these organizations, their true origins, so that they appear to have arisen spontaneously. But in fact they have the same creator, Tanton. IR: So the idea was to create the illusion of a grassroots movement that was supported by a significant number of Americans? SWARTZ: Yes indeed, to confuse the press. The leaked memos did bring some public attention to the Tanton network, and some of these linkages were further exposed in the early 1990s. More recently, fair's tax records established that the Center for Immigration Studies, which has become an influential Washington institution, was spun off from fair as a separate organization. But these facts aren't widely known by the public today. For years and years, fair and these other spinoffs have been part of a strategy of, “Well, it can't just be fair and other major Tanton creations like U.S. English and the Center for Immigration Studies, because then it's too easy to pin us down. So therefore how about creating NumbersUSA, English First, the American Immigration Control Foundation and all these smaller local groups?” All of this was anticipated by the memos, which were written in 1986, two years before the leak. IR: Has even the limited exposure of these kinds of linkages damaged the ability of Tanton's anti-immigrant groups to affect public policy in Congress? SWARTZ: They are well known to everybody deeply involved in the immigration debate. But when it comes to Congress, very few members - maybe two - can come close to understanding the situation or the history of the immigration reform efforts of the last 25 years.

www.newcomm.org | Center for New Community 10

Founded by John Tanton

LEGEND

Has financial or leadership ties to FAIR or U.S., Inc.

Founded as a project of FAIR or U.S., Inc.

Social Contract PressFounded by John Tanton in 1990. Tanton is publisher of

the Press’s quarterly journal, The Social Contract.

U.S. EnglishCo-founded by John Tanton in 1982/83.

He left the organization in 1988

Pro-EnglishJohn Tanton is the founding chairman of ProEnglish, established in 1994. He currently serves on its board

of directors.

Center for Immigration StudiesFounded by John Tanton in 1985 to serve as an independent

research organization for the Network.

Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI)Founded by John Tanton and FAIR leadership in 1989. IRLI, operating under the control of FAIR, works closely with lawmakers to draft anti-

immigrant legislation.

NumbersUSA Research and Education/Americans for Better Immigration – Founded as a project of U.S., Inc. in 1996 and became an independent organization in 2002. Founder Roy Beck is the former Washington Editor

of Tanton’s journal The Social Contract.

House Immigration Reform Caucus (HIRC)Founded in 1999 by former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo. Current

chairman Brian Bilbray is a former FAIR lobbyist and current co-chair of FAIR’s board of advisors.

State Legislators for Legal ImmigrationFounded in 2007 by Pennsylvania State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, State Legislators for Legal Immigration works closely with Immigration Reform Law Institute to draft state-level,

anti-immigrant legislation.

VDARE FoundationAnti-immigrant blog founded in 1999 by white-nationalist Peter Brimelow, a former editor for Forbes and

National Review. VDARE publishes articles from FAIR advisory board members Donald A. Collins and Joe Guzzardi, and has received funds from U.S., Inc.

US Immigration Reform PAC Co-founded in 1996 by Mary-Lou Tanton, John Tanton’s wife. She remains president of the orga-nization, which endorses political campaigns for House Immigration Reform Caucus members.

Negative Population Growth Founded in 1972. Current NPG president Donald Mann serves on FAIR’s national board of advisors.

NPG also received funding from FAIR in 2000.

9/11 Families for a Secure America Founded by Peter Gadiel after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Gadiel served on FAIR’s

board from 2003 to 2005 and 9/11 Families for a Secure America has received funds from U.S., Inc.

Progressives for Immigration ReformFounded in 2009, Progressives for Immigration Reform shares leadership with FAIR, including

Frank Morris, a FAIR board member, and Richard Lamm, a FAIR advisor. Current executive director Leah Durant was an attorney with FAIR’s legal arm, Immigration Reform Law Institute.

John Tanton’s Anti-Immigrant Network

US Inc.Founded by John Tanton in 1982. Tanton currently serves as the

organization’s chairman.

Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)Founded by John Tanton in 1979. Tanton served on FAIR’s board of directors

until 2011. He is currently on FAIR’s board of advisors.

Page 15 of 21

Human Life Review, October 28, 2012 Hijacking the Immigration Issue

There is much disagreement among social conservatives on the issue of immigration—which is natural. Many are alarmed about the flouting of American laws and the other negative aspects of illegal immigration. The modern American population-control movement is dominated by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), and NumbersUSA. These population-control groups have wisely sought to appeal to American conservatives in pursuit of one of their stated policy goals: To limit all immigration into the United States.18 They have been so successful that many columnists and editorials refer to them as some derivative of “quintessentially American.”19 In reality, however, they reflect a very dark side of American history.

The opinions of the abortion and population-control movements are dominant among the founders, funders, and board members of FAIR, CIS, and NumbersUSA. They represent the direct modern continuation of the 1960s and 1970s population-control movement—in many cases the same people involved in that movement decades ago sit on the boards of these three organizations.

Of course, not everyone concerned about immigration advocates population control, abortion, or sterilization.

However, the evidence shows that the primary leaders and funders of the anti-immigration movement were drawn to it because they were also active organizers and supporters of, and contributors to, the population-control movement in the United States. This should give pause to pro-life advocates who might consider collaborating with groups such as FAIR, CIS, and NumbersUSA on the issue of immigration.

THE NEW YORKER AUGUST 31, 2015 ISSUE

THE FEARFUL AND THE FRUSTRATED: DONALD TRUMP’S NATIONALIST COALITION TAKES SHAPE—FOR NOW.

BY EVAN OSNOS

“Ever since the Tea Party’s peak, in 2010, and its fade, citizens on the American far right—Patriot militias, border vigilantes, white supremacists—have searched for a standard-bearer, and now they’d found him. In the past, “white nationalists,” as they call themselves, had described Trump as a “Jew-lover,” but the new tone of his campaign was a revelation. Richard Spencer is a self-described “identitarian” who lives in Whitefish, Montana, and promotes “white racial consciousness.” At thirty-six, Spencer is trim and preppy, with degrees from the University of Virginia and the University of Chicago. He is the president and director of the National Policy Institute, a think tank, co-founded by William Regnery, a member of the conservative publishing family, that is “dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of European people in the United States and around the world.” The Southern Poverty Law Center calls Spencer “a suit-and-tie version of the white supremacists of old.” Spencer told me that he had expected the Presidential campaign to be an “amusing freak show,” but that Trump was “refreshing.” He went on, “Trump, on a gut level, kind of senses that this is about demographics, ultimately. We’re moving into a new America.” He said, “I don’t think Trump is a white nationalist,” but he did believe

Page 16 of 21

that Trump reflected “an unconscious vision that white people have—that their grandchildren might be a hated minority in their own country. I think that scares us. They probably aren’t able to articulate it. I think it’s there. I think that, to a great degree, explains the Trump phenomenon. I think he is the one person who can tap into it.”

Jared Taylor, the editor of American Renaissance, a white-nationalist magazine and Web site based in Oakton, Virginia, told me, in regard to Trump, “I’m sure he would repudiate any association with people like me, but his support comes from people who are more like me than he might like to admit.”

Page 17 of 21

LATE HEIRESS' ANTI-IMMIGRATION EFFORTS LIVE ON LA Times | July 25, 2013|By Joseph Tanfani

HEIRESS AND BIRD-LOVER CORDELIA SCAIFE MAY BELIEVED NATURE AND THE U.S. WERE UNDER SIEGE FROM RUNAWAY POPULATION GROWTH. EIGHT YEARS AFTER HER DEATH, SHE CONTINUES TO INFLUENCE THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE.

WASHINGTON — In a gilded but often lonely life, Cordelia Scaife May, heiress to one of America's most storied fortunes, had a few cherished passions.

Protecting birds was one. Keeping immigrants out was another.

An ardent environmentalist more comfortable with books and birds than with high-society galas, May believed nature was under siege from runaway population growth. Before her death in 2005, she devoted much of her wealth to rolling back the tide — backing birth control and curbing immigration, both legal and illegal.

Today, May's influence is stronger than ever. Her Pittsburgh-based Colcom Foundation has been the single-largest donor to the anti-immigration cause, providing more than $76 million over the last decade to groups that now are fighting to block immigration overhaul efforts in Congress.

In hyperpartisan Washington, most immigration opponents focus on beefing up border security and blocking any path to legal status for immigrants in the country without authorization.

May was driven by other concerns.

"Her worry in life, almost, was population control," said horticulturist George A. Griffith, a longtime friend. "I think she would stay awake at night just worrying about what would happen" to the environment from too many people.

"She loved animals almost more than people," Griffith said.

May also fretted about how immigrants might change America. She became a key backer of John Tanton, a Michigan ophthalmologist who founded a network of anti-immigration groups. In the 1980s, she paid to distribute in the United States a best-selling French novel called "The Camp of the Saints," which imagines poverty-stricken Third World immigrants overwhelming the West and destroying civilization.

May, known as "Cordy," never knew poverty. Her mother, Sarah, was a member of the Mellon family. One of the country's great financial dynasties, the family controls Mellon Bank and vast wealth in aluminum, oil and steel companies.

Page 18 of 21

U.S. immigration law: Decades of debate

May's brother, Richard Mellon Scaife, a major supporter of conservative organizations and causes, also has backed anti-immigration groups. His lawyer, Yale Gutnick, says Scaife is concerned about immigration's impact on national security: "When you open the gates, who's looking at who's coming in?"

Born in 1928, May had a gloomy childhood with nurses and governesses in the family mansion, Penguin Court, outside Pittsburgh. She later said the only time she heard laughter in the home was during visits from her mother's friend Margaret Sanger, the social reformer who founded what became the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

"She was the one who put what fun there was into our lives," May told Burton Hersh for his 1978 history of the Mellon family.

May became a generous supporter of Planned Parenthood, which in its early days supported population control. May kept a portrait of Sanger in her living room, and a "Stop the stork" bumper sticker on her Mercedes.

May also became a near recluse. She gave away millions of dollars annually to support educational, cultural and conservation causes with the provision that her involvement be kept secret.

Her millions didn't bring her happiness. Like her mother and other family members, she battled alcoholism. She named her home Cold Comfort, a wry reference to "Cold Comfort Farm," a popular 1932 comic novel about a woman "of every art and grace save that of earning her own living."

And when she died, she left more than $400 million — nearly half her fortune — to the Colcom Foundation, named for the same book. The foundation's mission is to promote "sustainable" immigration that won't overwhelm the environment or the economy, according to John Rohe, Colcom's vice president for philanthropy.

"No one wants this to be a nation of a billion people," Rohe said in an interview.

"We have zero tolerance for racism," he added. "From the bottom of my heart, this is not a racist agenda."

But some groups supported by Colcom have drawn fire for anti-immigrant views.

Before May died, Colcom gave more than $200,000 to Samuel Francis, a conservative columnist who called for halting immigration and opposed "all efforts to mix the races of mankind."

Page 19 of 21

Colcom also gave $5 million over the last decade to Californians for Population Stabilization, a nonprofit group based in Santa Barbara that seeks to restrict immigration. The chairwoman, Marilyn DeYoung, sparked controversy in March when she warned that children of immigrants can cause problems.

"A baby can join a gang and then commit a crime; a baby can drop out of school and become a criminal; a baby grows up," she said in a videotaped interview with Cuentame, a Latino advocacy group in Culver City. Authorities don't check "whether they're communist or whether they're drug smugglers or had felonies or had been in prison or anything."

DeYoung is now on sabbatical and the group has a new chairman, according to its website. The executive director, Jo Wideman, said DeYoung's comments were "not reflective of her views or of ours."

"Our position is the same," Wideman said. "It's not about who [immigrates]; it's about how many."

Colcom provides about half of the $5.6-million annual budget for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, one of the most prominent anti-immigration groups. Dan Stein, the president, said business interests seeking cheap labor, and politicians seeking Latino support, have drowned out any consideration of population and the environment in the current debate.

"Organizations that ought to care about population dynamics have sacrificed integrity to partisanship," he said. "It's all about getting votes."

Population control once was a central doctrine of the environmental movement. As birthrates began falling, May and others began to focus more on immigration — and most mainstream environmental groups turned away from population issues entirely. In 2004, a group of anti-immigration advocates tried to take control of the Sierra Club, sparking a contentious board election and court fights, but the attempt failed. Today, the Sierra Club backs immigration reform.

But the anti-immigration cause still draws support from some environmentalists. They include Fred Stanback, heir to a headache remedy fortune, who has given tens of millions of dollars to help preserve pristine areas in North Carolina, his home state.

Stanback also gives money to some of the same groups backed by Colcom: the Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA and Progressives for Immigration Reform. All advocate cutting both legal and illegal immigration.

Stanback supports a path to citizenship for the estimated 11 million people in the U.S. illegally. But he says he worries about "chain migration" — when immigrants who get legal status are able to bring in family members.

Page 20 of 21

"More people put more pressure on the environment," he said.

But May's contributions dwarf those from Stanback and other environmentalists. Friends say she would be happy to see her ideas reflected in the national debate, but mortified to see her name pulled into it.

"What she did — she never needed thanks," Griffith said. "She just wanted to work on projects she felt were good for mankind."

joseph.tanfani@latimes.com

Brian Bennett in the Washington bureau contributed to this report.

Copyright 2015 Los Angeles Times

Page 21 of 21

Appendix B: LIST OF ARTICLES FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

1. Evan Osnos, The New Yorker, THE FEARFUL AND THE FRUSTRATED: DONALD TRUMP’S NATIONALIST COALITION TAKES SHAPE—FOR NOW. AUGUST 31, 2015 ISSUE

1. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Pittsburgh's Colcom Foundation plays major role in immigration-control debate. Colcom also funds environmental groups, as part of its mission to 'maintain a balance' with Earth's resources, February 15, 2015

2. Center for New Community, The Quinacrine Report: Sterilization, Modern Day Eugenics and the Anti-Immigrant Movement, September 11, 2014

3. Center for New Community, The 21st Century Anti-Immigration Movement, 2014 4. Mario H. Lopez, Human Life Review, October 28, 2012, Hijacking Immigration? 5. Jason DeParle, NY Times, The Anti-Immigration Crusader, April 17, 2011 6. Morton M. Kondracke, Roll Call Executive Editor, Nativist Lobby’ Is Winning on

Immigration, Jan. 13, 2011 7. Jason Riley, Wall Street Journal, March 15, 2004 – GOP Nativists Tarnish Reagan’s

‘Shining City.’ 8. Southern Poverty Law Center, February 2009, The Nativist Lobby, Three Faces of

Intolerance (summary) 9. Southern Poverty Law Center Intelligence Report, Summer 2002, Issue 106, Defending

Immigrants: a Key Activist in the Struggle for Immigrant Rights [Rick Swartz] Discusses the Evolution and Nature of the Anti-Immigrant Movement

10. Southern Poverty Law Center Intelligence Report No. 106, Summer 2002, The Puppeteer, The organized anti-immigration 'movement,' increasingly in bed with racist hate groups, is dominated by one man

11. Senator Bob Bennett, April 20, 2000, Senators Sign Bennett Letter Condemning Tactics of Anti-Immigrant Group FAIR

12. Rick Swartz, Immigration and Refugees: Issues, Politics and Democratic Pluralism, March 1985